I was severely disappointed in this novel, by an author whose classically-themed books I enjoyed. I actually read the Virago 2005 reprint, which contains the Afterword by the author herself, but no other commentary.The story concerns the timid, repressed Elsie Lane's great adventure in running away from her stifling, conflict-ridden, suburban life in Cornwall, to go in search of her older sister Leonora, who also ran away, ostensibly with a man (actually, a good mate). Leo, as she's known, has all the independence and spirit that Elsie lacks. Elsie only gets up the spunk to make a break for it because she's fallen for the local doctor, Peter, an utterly charming cad who encourages her to develop herself more.Elsie finds Leo living in a houseboat on the Thames with her girlfriend Helen, a nurse. Helen is smart and sophisticated but also kind-hearted. After the initial shock, they take Elsie in on a temporary basis. In response, finally, to a letter Elsie writes him, Peter then turns up and proceeds to make a play for both Helen and Leo. He is partly successful, but doesn't seem to realise they both have his measure and quite wittily play him for a sucker.If this was all the story was wrapped around, it would have worked, but Renault utterly spoils it by introducing a much more substantial character, Joe Flint, a man raised for a time in Arizona, who now also lives on the river and who writes serious fiction. He has become Leo's best friend, giving her much of the material for the Westerns she writes for a living. He is, predictably enough, in love with Leo, but he manages to keep his feelings under wraps for quite a long time. However, one night he catches Leo having a light flirtation with Peter, a man he instinctively dislikes. Forcing the issue, he gets Leo to sleep with him and this plummets into a discovery that they actually care for each other deeply enough to cause Leo to consider leaving Helen and following Joe, who has announced, in a farewell letter to her, that he is leaving England to return to Arizona and that he'll wait for a few days, in case she wants to join him.The novel leaves this situation frustratingly unresolved. In the morning, Helen finds Leo asleep on the couch after coming home late the night before and assumes she's been with Peter. She gets a shock to discover it was Joe instead and is indecisive about going into work, but finally does, leaving Leo by herself. Leo starts to pack her things - intending, presumably, to follow Joe - but is pulled up short when she sees one of Helen's dresses. In confusion, she is left to cry her eyes out on the bed. Does she pull herself together and go to Joe? Does she leave a note for Helen? Does she stay until Helen comes home...? I found this sad, confusing ending totally unsatisfactory and very much out of phase with the tone of the rest of the novel. Leo and Helen have had a happy relationship for years; Leo and Joe, a top friendship. But Renault seems to suggest that all Leo's boyishness and independence is some kind of "arrested development"; find True Love with the Right Man and she'll be able to drop her competent, butch exterior and become a Real Woman after all!Renault wrote the book partly in response to the unrelieved misery of Radclyffe Hall's The Well of Loneliness, the first novel in English, as far as I'm aware, to feature lesbian relationships as the central theme and to plead for acceptance and understanding on the part of society. The book caused an almighty ruckus and was banned in the UK until 1948. Hall had the misfortune to be only a "middlebrow" writer, so the book cannot be read as seriously today; it is sentimental, overwritten and at times mawkishly self-pitying, so I can understand Renault's rejection of it. But it was never intended for people like Renault, with their smug sophistication; Hall was well aware of the many people in society who could never openly and honestly proclaim who they really were and she intended her novel to be read by her usual readership: people who went to church on Sundays and had probably never met a homosexual.While I can understand Renault's reaction to The Well, I find her comments, in the Afterword, on the "defensive stridency" of "congregated homosexuals waving banners" highly offensive. What kind of society does she think gays are living in? Until recent decades male homosexuality was against the law in western society; lesbianism, often simply unrecognised. In conclusion I would have to say that I regard this novel as not only poorly thought out, but also homophobic. I have yet to read the truly Great Gay Novel.
DAMN YOU MARY RENAULT! I am MAYBE 10 pages in and already I'm thinking, "hmm, they won't notice if I read for a few hours in my office right?" I wanted a book that will last me through the weekend but not be too heavy. I might be in trouble. ----------------------------------Finished. Yeah, I'm a little disappointed in the ending, if Leo is meant to have left but that's not how I read it. I read it as her standing at the crossroads and we are left to fill in the rest with our own imaginations. ----------------------------------Someone put this on the table at Union Square! Excitement!
Do You like book The Friendly Young Ladies (2003)?
I found this book annoying. It was written in response to the downbeat, seriousness of “The Well of Loneliness”, which the author derides. However, it fails in its attempt to be upbeat and, at points, leaves one with a nasty taste in the mouth regarding the friendly young ladies’ behaviour. Peter’s male arrogance is nicely done and he deserves all he gets, but neither Joe or Leo deserved their unkind fate, which provided a very downbeat ending. Much is made in the novel of “how things like that only happen in books” and this is clearly a comment by Renault about striving in her writing for a more naturalistic style. This causes two problems – 1) her dialogue is at times too “shorthand” between the characters as to be unintelligible, and 2) it is impossible to achieve in a novel. A novel is a novel and not real life. So, for all her posturing, the ending is unreal – people do not pack their bags and leave the next day because they have had an ill-judged love affair. For a better example of how to write an upbeat lesbian novel see “Carol” by Patricia Highsmith.
—V.T. Davy
Though this novel begins with the story of an unattractive and unintelligent girl who lives with her family in Cornwall, fairly early on it switches to the more interesting lives of two women who share a houseboat on the Thames in the late 1930s, and the impact on their (lesbian) relationship brought about by the men they interact with. The novel would not pass muster with the politically correct crowd, but is honest and interesting in its way, and certainly readable. I believe it includes the best description I've read of what happens to the equality between a man and a woman when sex enters the picture.
—Kat
I read this in 2005 and found it to be incredibly frustrating. For one thing, don't believe any of the blurbs on the back of the book - this book is neither a romance nor a comedy. It doesn't really have much at all to say about artists communities in the '30s. And for that matter, it doesn't really have that much to say about lesbian relationships either. The characters are mostly either dispicable or tragic. After reading this, I wrote a long exposition of my problems with this book here: http://magnetgrrl.livejournal.com/132... It's very spoilery.
—Megan
